Terri Schiavo's Parents Seek Divorce on Her Behalf
 

Ok, 12 more days until the tube comes out, and then we wait for her to expire.

Anyone want to start a pool on how long the civil suits take to start?

http://www.cnsnews.com//ViewNation.a...20050301a.html

Terri Schiavo's Parents Seek Divorce on Her Behalf
By Jeff Johnson
CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
March 01, 2005

(CNSNews.com) - Terri Schindler Schiavo's parents have asked Florida's Second District Court of Appeals to grant their daughter a divorce from her husband, Michael Schiavo. They charge him with a conflict of interest based on alleged adultery.

When Robert and Mary Schindler made the plea Monday to Pinellas-Pasco County Circuit Judge George Greer, he refused to accept any new filings in the case that are unrelated to plans for Terri's death.

Greer instructed Michael Schiavo to wait until March 18 to remove his wife's feeding and hydration tube, beginning the process of ending her life by dehydration and starvation. When David Gibbs III, the Schindler family attorney, tried to file some 15 new motions in the case, Greer refused to accept any that were not related directly to Terri's planned death, including the divorce petition.

But Terri's father, Robert Schindler, said the divorce petition must be considered in order to protect Terri from Michael Schiavo.

"We have filed divorce proceedings because of his total disregard for Terri as his wife," Mr. Schindler said. "He's married to Terri, but he's living with another woman and has two children by her.

"It has become quite obvious that his priorities are not what's in Terri's best interests," Mr. Schindler added.

George Felos, Schiavo's attorney, told the Associated Press, "I think everyone knows the parents are going to try anything, including throwing in the kitchen sink, to frustrate the court's final judgment."

But Gibbs countered that for Terri, "Remaining married to (Michael Schiavo) is an embarrassment."

Michael Schiavo announced his "engagement" in 1997 to the woman with whom he has since fathered two children and currently lives. Since that time, he has referred to the woman as his "fiancee" while remaining married to Terri, the Schindlers argue, so that he can continue to deny her rehabilitation and other therapy and to control her estate.

The motions Greer did agree to consider include requests concerning what might be the final days of Terri's life and the period immediately following her death. The Schindler family wants to be able to take photographs with Terri, something Michael Schiavo has forbidden with Greer's approval. They also want some members of the press to be present while they interact with their daughter to document her actual condition.

Robert and Mary Schindler also want Terri to be allowed to die at their home rather than in the hospice where she currently lives. They have also asked that her body be released to them for burial after her death. Michael Schiavo has made arrangements for Terri's body to be cremated immediately upon her death.

The Schindler family is appealing the new motions in Terri's case to the U.S. Supreme Court, as well.

If Terri's nutrition and hydration is discontinued March 18 in accordance with Judge Greer's instructions, doctors expect her to die from dehydration within a week to ten days. She could potentially survive as long as two weeks, long enough for the effects of starvation to set in.

The feeding tube has been removed twice in the past, once for two days and another time for six days.

Terri Schindler Schiavo suffered a brain injury in 1990 under questionable circumstances. Some physicians claim that her condition is a "persistent vegetative state" brought on by oxygen depravation following a heart attack that occurred as the result of a potassium imbalance caused by an eating disorder.

Other doctors have argued that there is physical evidence of an assault or abuse and that Terri's brain injury is the result of that alleged crime. Felos has denied that Michael Schiavo ever abused or assaulted his wife.

I don't understand what the problem is.

If I were the husband, I would arrange for the parents to take over all care and custody, (and financial responsibility), get a divorce, and be done with it. Move the hell on already.

Unless Terri had a living will (which I don't think she did or this wouldn't be an issue) then IMO, he has no grounds to want to kill her - I mean - let her die. If her parents want to keep her alive and accept that responsibility, then let them. What's the harm in that?

Don't you think her parents are holding onto a pipe dream?

I hope her parents fail once and for all and this woman is allowed to die. What a great husband she has. He's fought so hard just to carry out her last wishes. It's unfortunate her parents are sticking their noses into this. I realize they love her, but they are violating her wishes for their own greedy reasons to keep a shell of her around.

Was it her wish to die of starvation/dehydration over a 2-week period? Did she want to be cremated? If so fine. Otherwise I think the life-giving parents should have more say than an absent husband. See, you should never get married!

Two problems. One: her husband can't get married till she passes on. Two: Her husband sued when she first went comatose and won $1.3M. The money was placed in a trust fund which he will inherit (the balance of) once she passes. Trust funds are private so I don't think anyone knows the balance.

So, her husband wants her dead. Now.

So instead of a divorce, he wants her to die so he can have the money? How much of that trust is going to be left when all her medical bills are paid? Is it really worth all this hassle and bullshit?

This is why you should have a living will.

That's been determined to be the ethical alternative to assisted suicide.

I thought that was the motivation too... but I read an article awhile back on CNN that said the malpractice judgment was more in the realm of 12 million, and that the parents had offered many deals to the husband which gave him as much as 8 million if he would just walk away, and he refused them on the grounds that this was really about the fact that she had told him she would never want to be kept alive artificially. The money is almost all gone now, and he maintains he's never wanted any of it.

that's a reasonable conclusion. don't get married. you might end up in a coma and your husband and parents will be in court for years.

The parents say they see signs of a response from Terri despite doctors' claims that she's not capable. I used to think they were just grief-stricken or delusional, but last night I watched a special on people who have woken from anesthesia during surgery. The paralyzing component of the drug cocktail was working, but not the knock-you-out part. The doctors had no idea any of this was going on.

I assume they're monitoring Terri's brain function and not just going by visual signals, but that show gave me pause.

Here's another facet to the argument, though. If she does come out of her coma, what will her psychological condition be? If she has had some kind of awareness, but was unable to communicate, she's likely to be a basket case. The women on the show who endured the pain of surgery for a few hours were all changed forever. Some were suicidal, all were depressive, and all said that they had been fundamentally changed, never to return to their prior state. Imagine years of it. I think unless she were somehow able to wake up with complete amnesia of the past 15 years, she would prefer starvation.

I feel for the husband. I'm all for standing by your (wo)man, but that's some pressure. I don't think he should have a say anymore, though. He's moved on, and no longer has the emotional stake in this situation that the parents have. Tell him he can have the plug pulled but only if the money goes to the parents, and see what his reaction is.

If Clodfobble's right, and the money's almost gone, that may be moot.

No, he tried to move on.

Add to the mix ... depending on which Save Terry site you read, there's a suspicion that she's in the persistant vegetative state because of abuse by her husband, who has also (before the pulling the feeding tube episode) intentionally restricted care and therapy for her.

Frankly I think she's a green bean in a bed, but I can understand her parents continuing to have hope.

Every report I've read indicates that doctors have found flat EEGs and that large portions of her brain have turned into Cream of Wheat. As with Oakland, there's no "there" there. If these reports are accurate, there will be no miracle wake-up suitable for a Lifetime telemovie.

If _my_ wife was brain-dead, doctors had told me that she was beyond any hope of recovery, but my in-laws were bent on keeping what was left of her "alive" at any cost, you can be damn sure that I'd be fighting to let her go with a little dignity rather than getting a divorce and washing my hands of the matter.

Can I _blame_ the parents for desperately clinging to hope for a storybook ending? Nah. But this case has dragged on far beyond the point of ridiculousness.

Any money in accounts were long since spent on her care and keeping her on life support. She wanted to die. By all rights, he should be able to just give her an injection to help her die quickly, but some people have a problem with allowing people to die. So instead he did the right thing and kept fighting to respect her wishes. My wife's parents would never be able to stop me from carrying out my wife's wishes. Even if I had moved on romantically, I would not divorce and I would not stop fighting to carry out her last wish.

What he said.

Why is it that the same political people who would keep Terry Schiavo an alive vegatable would also promote capital punishment? What does their Bible tell them that justifies two contradictory opinions?

It may not be her wish to die of starvation/dehydration, but do you really think it is her wish to be in a vegetative state for 14 years?

Cat - marriage is the BEST :thumbsup: There will ALWAYS be temptations :cool:

And the beat goes on. What kind of juice does this family have to motivate the freakin US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES to introduce legislation rightnow to give the Federal Gov't jurisdiction to further interfere with this situation? Where are the grounds for this?!

I astonish myself to find I am nostalgic for the "good old days" when the Republican party stood for smaller government and states rights. "We want to get the gov't off your back", etc, etc.
/shakes head in frustration and dismay/

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=7927270

"Democracy is based on the assumption that a million men are wiser than one man. How's that again? I missed something."


"Autocracy is based on the assumption that one man is wiser than a million men. Let's play that over again, too. Who decides?"

The pearls of wisdom fell from the lips of Lazarus Long, a man who lived 2300 years (and counting). His story was recounted by Robert Heinlein, in _Time Enough For Love_. I give this book my highest recommendation. In fact I have given the book itself on many occasions.

These quotes sprang to mind when I read about the latest chapter in this sad saga. Why do the people in the US House believe they know better than all the courts in Florida? Could someone please explain that to me?

Thanks in advance.

No one ever thinks of these things when writhing naked in honeymooned bliss. But it could happen to you! :unsure:

or you could put away the fatalist attitude and live life. you can't live life not doing things because something might happen.

situations like this are relatively uncommon but serve as a warning to make sure that you have your affairs in order. Trusts, wills, DNR's, etc...

I do! That's the problem, I make these mistakes all the time! It's all just talk, I'm not miserable or holding back in "real life", just trying to find 'the better way' and maybe one day my mistakes won't matter.

mistakes? what mistakes? there are choices that if we had to do over again, we would of course choose the mulligan, but for the most part the initial choice/mistake is less important than the one that follows. how do we face the consequences of our previous choices? scream and cry that it's unfair? complain that nothing ever works? shrug and keep going? acknowledge a lesson learned not dwell on the negative?

i think a lot of people (not necessarily you, catwoman) spend life chasing a happiness that seems unobtainable for them, because they are consumed by the things that they cannot control. if we first realize what is within our ability to control and then focus on these things life becomes a bit easier and certainly less stressful.

we can't control other people, the world, the broken water pipe, the cat puking on the carpet, you company's decision to downsize...

you can control your own decisions and actions. that doesn't mean that when someone hurts you, you smile and say "thank you, can i have another." you can choose to be miserable, angry, focused on revenge, etc. or you can acknowledge that at some point all people will disappoint you and make the best of the situation in front of you. you can't control events in the past but you can control your reaction to them.

From CBS News


A voice vote. The spineless weasels even refused to stand up and be counted.

:rant: :bitching:
Please, someone help me here.

The word(s) I'm looking for are arrogance, cheating, hypocrisy...ok, I got the vibe now.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...1&pageNumber=0

The United States Senate, having failed to create legislation for ONE person, in time so they can leave for their Easter holiday, have in their ineffable wisdom, decided to achieve their goal of interferring meddling overruling with this person's life by calling her as a witness to a congressional hearing.

The reasoning (and I use the term verrrry loosely) is this:
They hope to intimidate the doctors who are scheduled to remove her feeding tube at 1pm EST. Will they risk federal prosecution on this score? Who knows?! But the result is the same: to threaten and scare the medical professionals iinto inaction. This is mere thuggery on the part of the lawmakers in Washington.

The shame is that it represents such a lowering of the standards of procedure that sustain our governmental institutions. Can't get what you want inside the rules, like agreeing to abide by a lower court's decision? Make a new law! Can't get the law passed? Obstruct with the threat of legal action, contempt of congress or some such boogie man.

It happened with the ANWR drilling proposal this week too. The proposal by itself would not have the votes to withstand a filibuster, so the language was added to the budget, a piece of legislation immune from filibuster. Again, can't win on the merits? Hide, obfuscate, piggyback, menace, misdirect, delay.

God, I'm gonna be sick. Why do we let these hypocrites bahave this way. Man, some bums is gonna get trown out!

Well put, BV.

I just find it absolutely appalling that legislators feel it's appropriate to meddle in this life-or-death affair. They have no business interfering with a case that is essentially a civil dispute at the very root. It's like fucking Judge Judy but on a much larger and much more ridiculous scale.


Oh, and looks like her feeding tube has been removed, per Judge Greer's order - to continue with removal regardless of govt actions - an hour or two ago.

PINELLAS PARK, Fla. (AP) _ A source close to the Terri Schiavo case tells The Associated Press that the severely brain-damaged woman's feeding tube has been removed.

All BS aside, I'm glad this matter will be over for her (hopefully very soon) and she can finally be at peace.

But don't you feel a surge of pride that our congressmen are so smart they can circumvent the rules that we mere peasants have to abide? :vomitblu:

Don’t forget why this controversy exists. Religious beliefs being imposed upon others. Science says she is a human vegetable. But those of religious superiority insist science must be wrong. Why? Political extremists just know they see intelligence - science be damned. Religious beliefs again being promoted upon others. You don't have the right to die. Extremist (Ashcroft) also did this in Oregon in direct contradiction to the voters wishes. Just another example of Satanism - imposing religious beliefs upon others.

Oh, bullshit. Her parents aren't trying to keep her alive because of religious reasons, their motives should be patently obvious. And legislators want to keep her alive because her husband's motives are suspect and they feel sympathy for the parents, plus it gets them compassion points with voters who care about this sort of thing.

Next you're gonna tell me the goddamn MBAs are responsible for keeping Terri alive.

Husband's motives remain unchallenged. In fact, without right wing religious support, her parents would have long ago been made irrelevant. Years of repeated testimony and court decisions have declared Terry brain dead. And yet righteous third parties keep appearing with another excuse and lots of legal money. They may even be trying to bankrupt the husband to force their will on Terri Schiavo. FL Supreme Court judge in a blunt accusation of Federal intervention was quite clear why Terri is still so painfully kept alive as a vegetable.

Yes, the parent’s motives are not religious. But religious extremist intervention is the only reason this case continues. As the network news so bluntly reports it, the religious right is using Terri Schiavo as a litmus test of their political representatives.

Why would any Federal law maker even dare touch this hot potato? The smart politician stays away from this issue. But this case has been made by the religious right into a litmus test of politicians. A sort of “either you are with us or against us” challenge. If the religious right had not decided to make this a test case, then Terri Schiavo would have long ago taken the same path as thousands before her. Without outside pressure, Federal law makers would avoid the whole issue. At this point, the parents are nothing more than pawns in a big, ugly test of political action by the religious right. The only political force protecting Terri Schiavo's rights are the FL courts and the US Supreme Court that refuses to hear the case. Rightly so. This is about about protecting Terri Schiavo. This is about religous political action. Another rallying cry to promote 'right to life' issues - Terry Schiavo, her husband, and the FL State court system be damned. Their rights don’t matter when issues of god are involved.

To declare the husband’s motives suspect is not based upon fact. That reason is the masquerade for another issue – forcing 'right to life' religious doctrine on others.

The right to life doctrine is "forced" upon others because it never seems to be the person in question who wants to die but, rather, those who benefit from the death of the person in question. What you are defending is not the right to die but the right to terminate the life of another.

I think Terri Schiavo would be better off dead but its not for you and me to say. Its for her parents and her husband to say and they are not in agreement so the government has get involved. Well, the government is not in unanimous agreement either. Hence, we are in the mess we are in.

You can single out one side or the other for ridicule and that is your right. But, your view remains "one man's opinion" and has no more legitimacy than anyone else's.

FL law is quite bluntly clear about this. Terri's parents have no rights and no say. It is Terri's husband's decision to honor her request. Furthermore, every legal entity with jurisdiction has ruled in favor of the husband and in the wishes of Terri Shiavo - as testified to by her husband and others. Those are facts. Anything beyond that is best called wild speculation.

The only reason Terri has been left in such a tortured state is that others without jurisdiction keep challenging the decisions of the person who has the right to make that decision AND challenged the courts who have the legal authority to grant that request. Again, even the Supreme Court of the United States looked at this case and refused to intervene. Why? There is no case to justify a reversal. The many powers that are legally responsible have all come to the same agreement. It is that open and shut. Terri Schiavo stated her wishes and the courts keep trying to honor her requests.

There are others with shameful agendas not in the interest of Terri Shiavo. To not speak out against this self righteous types is classicly anti-American. From the NY Times of 19 Mar 2005 Notice the religious references repeatedly used to deny Terri Schiavo and her husband their rights

Terri Schiavo and her husband are the victims. There is no way around that fact. Even the FL Supreme Court judge today was quite blunt about that fact. The courts have ruled on what they decided were her intentions. FL says bluntly and without doubt that her husband is the only person with legal status to make that decision for her. Her parents have no say - as it should be. Those are the facts no matter how many self serving religious political types want to screw the Schiavos for political gain. Those who have the rights are instead made into victims - for other's poltical gain.

To not stand up for the rights of the Schiavo is classicly anti-American. How dare others with no standing would torture Terri Schiavo and her family. That is beyond a doubt the facts - and shameful. Every court with jurisdiction has made a decision not upon religion. And therein lies the problem. They did not impose religion when deciding to grant Terri Schiavo's requests. Courts instead made decisions based upon the facts. Shame on anyone who gives credence to those such as Tom DeLay. Making the Schiavo's into victims totally for political gain. Shame on anyone who would deny the only facts. Terri Schiavo has the right to die as she requested. Anyone else (ie her parents) have no standing. Those are facts. What is left are others with self serving agendas. Again, they would vicimize Terri Schiavo to perform litmus tests on their politicians. It is that pathetic.

I really hope that NY Times quote was from the editorial section, tw. If not, it's a prime example of why Fox News has flourished in this country.

Mr. DeLay's only long held religious belief is that he should be in the news for something other than multiple ethics violations.

Terri
 

I'd be interested to hear some of your opinions on this - if Terri's death was happening by a method other than slowly starving her to death, would these arguments still be the same as they are now? The "slowly starving her to death" is the only part that makes me have second thoughts. Maybe its just the sound of it, I don't know how it will be for her physically, and I suppose nobody knows how it will be for her mentally. (I'm sure they'll be medicating her to make sure she's "as comfortable as possible".) If she was being allowed (forced?) to die quickly, in a 100% certain pain-free manner, would this debate be the same, and would it be dominating the news?
I believe its time to "let her go" but I understand it is hell for her family. I'm sure it wouldn't be so difficult for them, if she was in an obviously comatose state, not blinking, "smiling", and in their opinion, responding to them.
(And I have no trouble believing that she wouldn't want to live this way. Whether she ever voiced that to her husband or not, who would say that they want want to live that way?)

Thats a fact.

Its a shame when these matters go outside the family and caregivers. There is suspicion, however, of the husbands original motives, although I don't know that it changes her legal status. We're too removed to truly understand what's going on there. The media likes to cook these things down so they can tell a simple story, the Times has religous extremists and I assume Fox has a murderous husband, but the person whose opinion matters most isn't talking.

I find the case uninteresting. My dogs have more consciousness than Terri Schiavo for the last 15 years.

There's only one aspect I find interesting... its really ironic that people are mad that Schiavo is now starving to death, when it's thought her coma was the result of bulimia.

That is very ironic. I haven't followed the story that much- I've just caught parts of it a couple times a week that I can't help but seeing, considering that it's hard to read a paper or watch the news without seeing it. I missed the part about the bulimia!.
I should do my homework better before I post!

The "slowly starving her to death" is the only part that makes me have second thoughts. Maybe its just the sound of it, I don't know how it will be for her physically, and I suppose nobody knows how it will be for her mentally.

Actually, doctors have a pretty good understanding of how it will be for her, mentally. In seeing what parts of her brain suffered oxygen death, it is certain she won't feel any suffering, as she pretty much isn't feeling anything even at the moment. With nothing more than partial frontal lobes and a brain stem, her body is "alive", but her "life" left a long time ago.

There's only one aspect I find interesting... its really ironic that people are mad that Schiavo is now starving to death, when it's thought her coma was the result of bulimia.

I've been hearing this a lot, lately, but I haven't found out if it is anything more than a rumor. If its true, a lot of people seem to want to keep this aspect of the situation quiet.

Does anyone find it strange that the religious right likes to play the part of the god they worship? They'll go against all natural odds and laws to keep a suffering woman alive, all while trying their hardest to put to death the people they have convicted of high crimes. I'm not sure why, but both of these ideals seem to go against the religious banner they wrap it all in.

It's no rumor... a jury agreed to that finding in her medical malpractice trial.

unbiased information from a florida law-blogger's site

drinking 10-15 glasses of iced tea each day

:eek:
Thats absolutely insane.

From the blog:
Some believe Terri's husband has been motivated by money. Some believe that no heart attack occurred -- instead, Terri's husband beat her nearly to death and has been trying to end her life ever since. Some believe he is a bad person because he has taken up with another woman and has children with her.

I wonder how much bodyguard protection Terri's husband has now or will have if Terri's death comes as it is supposed to. If I were him, I'd move far, far away...

Or he could do us all a favor and avail himself of the favorable gun laws in Florida.

"Take a number please, Mr. Schiavo will be with you shortly..."

Here's something weird I found on Wikipedia:

How strange!
I personally think the parents are off their rocker -- there's nothing left but the brainstem. Besides which, they have no rights at all in this case. When you get married, your legal next-of-kin is your spouse. That's just one of the many legal changes that you've just entered into.
If you don't trust your spouse, file a medical power of attorney. I know a person who did just that, and given his mother the poa because his wife would have tried to keep him alive.
Terri didn't get a medical power of attorney. Therefore her husband gets to make all the calls. Period.

- Pie

Besides which, they have no rights at all in this case.

Isn't it amazing that a case that is so simple and should require no debate at all has gained the attention of both Congress and the President and caused them to take actions so wildly unconstitutional that the forefathers are spinning in their graves?

New term I learned from this event: "Culture of Life", which deems all human life to be blessed, sacred, and protected above all laws.

...except capital punishment, of course.

Bush is an idiot.

The legislature is a bunch of whores.

Bush is using his mandate, and a republican lead house and senate, to do what he wants because he doesn't have to worry about getting reelected.

Let's see what the SCOTUS does with this one. I don't see it lasting very long. Just long enough to hurt somebody.

The husband's motives are NOT suspect. He's the only one whose motives have been consistantly pure. He's turned down millions of dollars. He hasn't remarried. He has fought in 13 court cases over 15 years when it would be easier just to walk away, but instead of doing what was easy, he did what his wife wanted him to do. He fought to allow her body to die.

Terri Shiavo the person died 15 years ago. It's about time people stop meddling and let her body die too. The motives of her husband are above reproach. He's an honorable and decent man trying to do the right thing for his wife by carrying out her last wish.

It's got to be horrible to lose a child, but it's time her parents admit she was already lost, and move on.

There's more and more information that's coming out that makes Michael Schiavo look worse and worse. Is he really? I don't know. I end up missing lot of good info and interviews because of my work schedule. Did anyone see the one that was supposed to have run tonight, with a doctor who treated Terri fairly early on when she was being provided rehab? According to what I heard (from a late night talk radio listener, so I'm skeptical of the source as a matter of course) Terri was able to verbalize, and was ambulatory to some degree, although she needed to hang onto stuff to get from point A to point B. The therapy stopped when the husband got the settlement from the malpractice suit, Terri was moved into a nursing home and the attempts at rehab were discontinued.

I'm also a bit surprised that nobody's mentioned the best known "right to die" case up to this point, that of Karen Ann Quinlan. Many people remember the fight to terminate her life support. Karen Ann was on a respirator as a consequence of her taking drugs and drinking alcohol at a party. She lapsed into a coma, and was put on a respirator. Her parents fought a long court battle to have her removed from the respirator. What many people don't remember, is that she didn't die. She remained alive, but in a persistent vegetative state for another 10 years until she died of pneumonia.

The difference being that Karen's parents were fighting to let her die, Terri's parents want keep her alive. Also I think Karen would have died a lot quicker if they had stopped feeding her like they want to do with Terri.

My personal opinion on this case is that Karen's parents should be allowed to do as they wish with their daughter. The husband seems to have moved on with his life, he got a settlement and has a girlfriend and kids now. I think biological bonds should be considered stronger that marital bonds anyway.

Clearly you get along with your parents. :)

:thumbsdn:
Which parent? Mine are reduced to spitting and name calling when in proximity, would they have to agree? Or would my husband be the deciding vote anyway?

Has everyone updated their will?

First, my sympathies to Michael and Terri, and the Schindlers in this very personal tragedy. Regardless of which "side" I am "on", or you are "on", what has happened is very sad. I will continue to pray for all of them.

Really. So you believe that, in general, the wishes of one or both parents should overrule the wishes of the spouse? Or maybe the spouse should be a tiebreaker if the parents disagree? Or perhaps it should take both parents in agreement to outvote the spouse?

Really. So you believe that, in general, the wishes of one or both parents should overrule the wishes of the spouse? Or maybe the spouse should be a tiebreaker if the parents disagree? Or perhaps it should take both parents in agreement to outvote the spouse?

It doesn't really matter which anyone thinks is stronger. Legally, marriage makes your next-of-kin your spouse. As for Terri, this was already resolved in an earlier court case in which it her parents agreed that her husband had custody of Terri.

I have seen Michael Schiavo on TV over the past 2 weeks being interviewed on several shows. He seems to be selectively espousing his marriage vows. First he says that he vowed to be with Terri in sickness and in health. What happened to forsaking all others. I guess that does not apply to his current fiance.

I am troubled why someone would allow the parents of a disabled person to suffer thru this. Many people have said it is because Schiavo wants to be married again in the Catholic Church. Well the last time a relative of mine tried to get married in our local church to the mother of his out of wedlock child it was a no-go. I doubt that is Mr. Schiavo's motivation.

One last item. I think one of his kids is about 9 years old. What does he tell that child about constantly being on the news regarding his real wife. That poor kid must get tormented in school.

Casting aspersions on his moral character is just as irrelevant as whether you think a parent's bond is stronger than a spouse's. The fact of the matter is that the spouse is the next of kin, and the parents' lawsuits have been frivolous (in the legal sense of the word, I'm sure they were perfectly heartfelt). There is no legal basis at all for overturning his decision, and even less for bumping it up to federal court.

That's the real scandal here. Congress just decided they didn't like a whole string of court decisions, so they wrote a law that said, "Try this case again, and pretend that the other verdicts didn't happen".

I am troubled why someone would allow the parents of a disabled person to suffer thru this.

I'm troubled as to why the parents are doing this to themselves.